The Amazing Spider-Man 2 Better 3 Villains: TASM2 Or SM3?

[The Joker]

It's shouldn't surprise you that in a visual form of storytelling, visuals are extremely important, even the smallest ones. You posted a perfect picture to illustrate my ambivalence to Ock's early design. It's an ambitious concept, but a poor execution. Not only to Ock's arms appear thin and frail, he's often balanced on them while fighting. They aren't drawn to have a particularly steady base, which leads the reader to assume that he would be easy to knock off balance and prone to slipping. Moreover, for a villain who engages his foe at a distance, having compromised eyesight is a further hindrance.

Moreover, you're missing the point of Molina's physique and the brilliance of Raimi's Ock design. Molina didn't look like a bodybuilder, but he did look sturdy and powerful. Some of the questions that are instantly raised about comic Ock are: If he's in such bad shape, how does he have the hip and leg strength to move his arms when he's using them all simultaneously? How does his human body endure the impact of a fight? How does the soft tissue and bone around his mechanical arms keep from tearing when he's moving them around quickly and violently during a fight?

I think Raimi understood that no matter popular a character is, he or she sometimes has logic problems (silver and golden age characters are more prone to this) that need to be addressed. His father was overly critical and abusive, so why would young Octavious feel so upset about his death? Moreover, he was already a successful adult when his mother died, so wouldn't logic dictate that he have some better coping skills? If you peel the layers of comic Ock there is A LOT wrong with him.

Don't get me wrong. I realize that every comic character has some areas that just need to be accepted with a grain of salt, and I don't mind Ock as part of the S6 or in a panoramic story. He's a decent character, but that's about as far as I'll go.

The tentacles did not appear thin and frail. Least of all in those pics I posted. They look like long, thick mechanical snakes. Looking at him standing on two of them, especially when they have claws at their ends for grip and balance, (both for standing on and climbing things with) didn't give off any notion that he would easily slip. I've never heard these complaints before until now. And since when did something looking 'thin' and I use that word only because it's your description, mean something was automatically weak and not strong? I know I'm talking to someone who has the usually fat Santa Claus looking like a body builder in his avatar, but you are so hung up on beefy looks that it's blinded you to reality.

Those questions you cited are not regularly raised. Who says Ock is such bad shape? Show me a comic book panel that states his health or physique is that bad that supporting his tentacles is too much for him. That's ridiculous. Being a chubby guy doesn't mean he's a frail weak man who can't support the weight of the arms. You talk like he's a huge fatso or something. Some artists don't even draw Ock as chubby, including in his original inception with Ditko. Even Romita Sr. described him as just "a little dumpy" when he drew him.

If anything it's the Raimi version of Doc Ock that got frequently questioned as to how he could endure the level of punishment he took in Spider-Man 2. Falling off clock towers, smashing into taxi cabs, being frequently punched in the face by Spidey etc and not showing being phased by any of it. The comic book character often gets taken out usually with a single punch from Spider-Man. The challenge for Spider-Man in the comics when he fights Ock is to get in close to him in the first place to hit him.

My response I always give to all those who question the movie version is two points;

- The movie version has A.I. wired into his brain and central nervous system, so he won't lose consciousness so easily
- Spidey, like in the comics, pulls his punches. He would not be using great power with great responsibility if he put his fist through Ock's face now would he.

Now about being upset at his father's death, where on earth did you ever get the impression he was sad at all that his dad died? He hated his father. He never shed so much as a tear for his passing. Again it's another great mirror image between him and Peter. Peter was devastated at losing Uncle Ben. His father figure. Octavius was didn't give a hoot when his dad died.

As for his mother, he was living under his mother's roof (like Peter and Aunt May), and indeed her influence right into adulthood when he became a successful scientist. It was his mother's emotional control and blackmail over him that cost him the only woman Otto ever loved. He fell for a fellow scientist called Mary Alice (Otto's Mary Jane), and they got engaged. When he told his mother she flipped out and said she can't believe he planned to desert her like that, and forced him to break up with her.

That's when he really went off the rails;

Again it's the anti Peter Parker stance. Aunt May was always supportive of Peter finding love. Whereas Otto's mother was a selfish possessive biotch who wanted her son to be alone so she could have him to herself. As you can see he clearly caused her own death out of anger and vengeance. He had nothing to cope with. He was already on the dark side. Getting the tentacles fused to his body was just the tipping point. Like putting a loaded gun in a maniac's hand.

There's also a theory the comics proposed that the brain damage Ock supposedly suffered from the accident in ASM #3 was not actually brain damage, but in fact hi brain's chemistry rewriting itself to accommodate the new mechanical appendages.

 

[LizardMan07]

The tentacles are less thick than his arms so I see what he means.

 

[Doctor Octopus]

It's shouldn't surprise you that in a visual form of storytelling, visuals are extremely important, even the smallest ones. You posted a perfect picture to illustrate my ambivalence to Ock's early design. It's an ambitious concept, but a poor execution. Not only to Ock's arms appear thin and frail, he's often balanced on them while fighting. They aren't drawn to have a particularly steady base, which leads the reader to assume that he would be easy to knock off balance and prone to slipping. Moreover, for a villain who engages his foe at a distance, having compromised eyesight is a further hindrance.

You are wrong. The tentacles always looked strong and deadly. There is only one artist I have ever seen who drew them as looking a bit too thin and weak looking and that was Ross Andru.

If they looked too weak then there would have been lots of complaints from fans to Marvel and they would have had their artists change them up. But that never happened. But even if they did look thin, your argument would still be wrong. You should know size doesn't equal to strength too. Peter Parker looks slim and skinny but he is super strong. Dr. Octopus' arms were also made out of a metal that was strong enough to resist radiation, and bullets, and pumpkin bombs and lots of other things. So you have no reason to be questioning their strength.

A rope looks really thin, much thinner than human arms and legs, and are able to hold weights much larger than any human can hold.

Moreover, you're missing the point of Molina's physique and the brilliance of Raimi's Ock design. Molina didn't look like a bodybuilder, but he did look sturdy and powerful. Some of the questions that are instantly raised about comic Ock are: If he's in such bad shape, how does he have the hip and leg strength to move his arms when he's using them all simultaneously? How does his human body endure the impact of a fight? How does the soft tissue and bone around his mechanical arms keep from tearing when he's moving them around quickly and violently during a fight?

Lol Alfred Molina did not look any bigger or sturdier than comic book Doc Ock. You are really asking why doesn't his bones and tissue tear when he's moving around in a fight, when you are in a comic book world where we are meant to believe people can be made from sand and electricity and turn into Lizards and have spider powers. Then there is all the tech that is created that is implausible, too lol.

I think you are making up complaints now to make something you prefer try and look better.

I think Raimi understood that no matter popular a character is, he or she sometimes has logic problems (silver and golden age characters are more prone to this) that need to be addressed. His father was overly critical and abusive, so why would young Octavious feel so upset about his death? Moreover, he was already a successful adult when his mother died, so wouldn't logic dictate that he have some better coping skills? If you peel the layers of comic Ock there is A LOT wrong with him.

Sam Raimi took it further than the comics lol. He had Dr. Octopus take punches from Spider-Man and lots of other worse things and not get hurt or knocked out cold. Molina looking sturdier would not make that plausible lol.

He did not care when his dad died. His mother's death did not affect him. He cause her to die out of anger and rage.

 

[Lantern Venom]

The tentacles did not appear thin and frail. Least of all in those pics I posted. They look like long, thick mechanical snakes. Looking at him standing on two of them, especially when they have claws at their ends for grip and balance, (both for standing on and climbing things with) didn't give off any notion that he would easily slip. I've never heard these complaints before until now. And since when did something looking 'thin' and I use that word only because it's your description, mean something was automatically weak and not strong? I know I'm talking to someone who has the usually fat Santa Claus looking like a body builder in his avatar, but you are so hung up on beefy looks that it's blinded you to reality.

Those questions you cited are not regularly raised. Who says Ock is such bad shape? Show me a comic book panel that states his health or physique is that bad that supporting his tentacles is too much for him. That's ridiculous.

Again it's the anti Peter Parker stance. Aunt May was always supportive of Peter finding love. Whereas Otto's mother was a selfish possessive biotch who wanted her son to be alone so she could have him to herself. As you can see he clearly caused her own death out of anger and vengeance. He had nothing to cope with. He was already on the dark side. Getting the tentacles fused to his body was just the tipping point. Like putting a loaded gun in a maniac's hand.

There's also a theory the comics proposed that the brain damage Ock supposedly suffered from the accident in ASM #3 was not actually brain damage, but in fact hi brain's chemistry rewriting itself to accommodate the new mechanical appendages.

We'll just have to disagree on their appearance. They always looked like metal hoses, which could be easily broken by a super-powered foe. Even if we accept that the metal has a particularly high level of tensile strength, how does Ock's normal physiology support the weight of such devices and provide the necessary torque to move them as his mind wishes? Given that Ock grew up with a mother who loathed manual labor (and by extension, physicality) and was a reclusive student, how is is body prepared to do such an unusual task?

The tentacles are less thick than his arms so I see what he means.

I really liked that Raimi's version had divided links like a spinal column rather than the comics where the metal inexplicably bends. The hospital scene also established that the arms were unable to be damaged in conventional ways like, making them a threat to Spider-man's strength.

You are really asking why doesn't his bones and tissue tear when he's moving around in a fight, when you are in a comic book world where we are meant to believe people can be made from sand and electricity and turn into Lizards and have spider powers. Then there is all the tech that is created that is implausible, too lol.
.

Yes, we are dealing with things of an implausible nature, but the more loopholes a fictional story has, the harder it is to suspend disbelief. Underneath the arms, Octavious is a man of substandard physicality, with no mutant healing factor, and no particular combat training to have honed his reflexes to make his especially proficient at using weaponry. In one of his early encounters with Spidey, he was taken out quite easily. That always made more sense than the arms somehow giving Otto foresight to not only deal with Spider-man's enhanced strength, dexterity, spider-sense, and speed, but the arms somehow allowing him to fend off multiple super-powered attackers.

 

[The Joker]

We'll just have to disagree on their appearance. They always looked like metal hoses, which could be easily broken by a super-powered foe. Even if we accept that the metal has a particularly high level of tensile strength, how does Ock's normal physiology support the weight of such devices and provide the necessary torque to move them as his mind wishes? Given that Ock grew up with a mother who loathed manual labor (and by extension, physicality) and was a reclusive student, how is is body prepared to do such an unusual task?

What do you mean even if we accept the metal has a high level of tensile strength? There is no "we". Until today I'd never come across such a criticism and I was here for all the lengthy Doc Ock discussions in the pre Spider-Man 2 days. Secondly there is no room for doubt on this issue. They factually do have that high level of strength as evidenced in every story Ock has appeared in since 1963. All I did was post a few examples of him doing some really impressive feats with them. If you refuse to accept what is true then that's your choice.

As for his physiology supporting the arms, unless they weigh an unbearable amount, there is no reason why he should not be able to support them (even though half the time he uses two of them to walk on). There is no physicality on his part required to operate the arms. They are linked to his body via a large metal harness which distributes their weight around his chest and torso. Of course they are all controlled mentally. If the weight of them was all concentrated on one single spot on his body it would indeed be questionable. No more so than Molina's Ock, whom for some unknown reason these are not issues for you just because in your eyes he looks sturdier.

Oh and your point about how the metal inexplicably bends; the circular lines all along the arms are obvious swivel and axis joints allowing them to coil and bend;

Honestly I can't believe someone is asking about the fine mechanical details about something like this in a Marvel comic book world. Beggars belief.

 

[Lantern Venom]

What do you mean even if we accept the metal has a high level of tensile strength? There is no "we". Until today I'd never come across such a criticism and I was here for all the lengthy Doc Ock discussions in the pre Spider-Man 2 days. Secondly there is no room for doubt on this issue.

I doubt that I'm the first person to raise this line of questioning. However, even if it's an original line of thinking, does that negate is validity?

As for his physiology supporting the arms, unless they weigh an unbearable amount, there is no reason why he should not be able to support them (even though half the time he uses two of them to walk on). There is no physicality on his part required to operate the arms. They are linked to his body via a large metal harness which distributes their weight around his chest and torso. Of course they are all controlled mentally. If the weight of them was all concentrated on one single spot on his body it would indeed be questionable. No more so than Molina's Ock, whom for some unknown reason these are not issues for you just because in your eyes he looks sturdier.

Imagine this scenario: you're wearing a harness similar to Ock's with ball-and-chain attachments. The balls weigh 25 lbs each. You're asked to keep your feet and body steady as the balls are launched repeatedly in different directions over a period of, let's say, 10 minutes. Do you think your core muscles, balance, tendon strength, and cardiovascular endurance would be tested under such conditions?

Look at the angle of his back in the picture in the lower right that you posted. Is he a master yogi? How does normal human anatomy hold up to such traumatic angles and force? The answer is that it wouldn't for very long.

Oh and your point about how the metal inexplicably bends; the circular lines all along the arms are obvious swivel and axis joints allowing them to coil and bend;

Honestly I can't believe someone is asking about the fine mechanical details about something like this in a Marvel comic book world. Beggars belief.

So a hero who can lift 10 tons can't break titanium segments? What about the villains who exceed Spidey's strength level? Those pinchers are also disproportionate to the rest of the arms, which only reinforces my point about them appearing questionable as a means of steady locomotion, let alone scaling walls.

Also, are you really shocked by such intricate character breakdowns on a message board like this? That's the very nature of a place like this.

 

[The Joker]

I doubt that I'm the first person to raise this line of questioning. However, even if it's an original line of thinking, does that negate is validity?

Yeah it does. It means in over 50 years of the character's existence it's never been an issue. Which means it's a non entity complaint. In other words you're complaining over nothing.

Imagine this scenario: you're wearing a harness similar to Ock's with ball-and-chain attachments. The balls weigh 25 lbs each. You're asked to keep your feet and body steady as the balls are launched repeatedly in different directions over a period of, let's say, 10 minutes. Do you think your core muscles, balance, tendon strength, and cardiovascular endurance would be tested under such conditions?

Yes absolutely. Especially since Ock often balances himself with two arms when fighting with the other two. I have never seen a fight between Spidey and Ock go on for 10 minutes and not see him do that.

Look at the angle of his back in the picture in the lower right that you posted. Is he a master yogi? How does normal human anatomy hold up to such traumatic angles and force? The answer is that it wouldn't for very long.

What are you talking about? There's no reason why it wouldn't when he's using the arms to support his weight there, not the other way around. He's using them to climb.

So a hero who can lift 10 tons can't break titanium segments? What about the villains who exceed Spidey's strength level?

Of course he can. And he has;

This was only out of sheer on the spot rage when Ock almost killed the Black Cat by beating her near to death in the Owl/Octopus gang war arc. It's the equivalent to ripping off Ock's own arms which is why he's screaming in pain there. It almost killed him. That's why Spider-Man never did it before. That's when Ock upgraded to adamantium coated arms.

Those pinchers are also disproportionate to the rest of the arms, which only reinforces my point about them appearing questionable as a means of steady locomotion, let alone scaling walls

The pincers are not disproportionate at all. They are perfectly proportionate and deeply interconnected into the length of the arms themselves to provide perfect balance. They're going through the whole length of the arms, not just the foundations.

Also, are you really shocked by such intricate character breakdowns on a message board like this? That's the very nature of a place like this.

Not at all. I get involved in them all the time. Only difference is they're usual valid ones, and not non entity invalid petty complaints. No offense.

 

[Lantern Venom]

Yeah it does. It means in over 50 years of the character's existence it's never been an issue. Which means it's a non entity complaint. In other words you're complaining over nothing.


Of course he can. And he has;

Not at all. I get involved in them all the time. Only difference is they're usual valid ones, and not non entity invalid petty complaints. No offense.

I'm not complaining about Ock as much as saying that stories with him as a primary threat to a multi-dimensional super-powered being like Spidey aren't my favorite because Ock has some conceptual problems. I can digest Ock stories more easily if he's opposing a hero like Daredevil or Punisher or in a group story.

As a solo act, logic dictates that he's an easily dispatched adversary, especially to someone of Spidey's power level or greater.



And while I always thought that classic Ock's motivations were a little banal, for the sake of full disclosure, I'm only mildly familiar with the Marvel Now! Ock. My Spidey reading has been a little spotty since 2009 or so. What I've read of the Superior Spidey story arc was only decent, but perhaps there are gems yet undiscovered.

 

[The Joker]

I'm not complaining about Ock as much as saying that stories with him as a primary threat to a multi-dimensional super-powered being like Spidey aren't my favorite because Ock has some conceptual problems. I can digest Ock stories more easily if he's opposing a hero like Daredevil or Punisher or in a group story.

I get what you've been saying, I just find no credibility to the complaint. Ock is one of Spidey's most deadly and powerful enemies. That's why he can go toe to toe with Spidey, the entire Sinister Six etc. Your issues over tissue damage and joints in the tentacles sound like fanboy made non entity complaints. Particularly when you seemingly have no issue with Molina's Ock in this regard just because he looks like he has a more sturdier body. Again no offense meant.

Ummm yeah that's the indestructible Hulk (whom Ock previously whupped in the Revenge of the Sinister Six arc with his new adamantium arms) who's like beaten nearly everyone in the MU.

And while I always thought that classic Ock's motivations were a little banal, for the sake of full disclosure, I'm only mildly familiar with the Marvel Now! Ock. My Spidey reading has been a little spotty since 2009 or so. What I've read of the Superior Spidey story arc was only decent, but perhaps there are gems yet undiscovered.

Superior Spider-Man is a classic example of our aforementioned discussion about Ock being the anti-Peter Parker. That's why Marvel chose him to inhabit Peter's body and life for the last two years. He fits so easily into it because he comes from the same kind of background and life as Peter. They really went full on with it and the gamble paid off.

I loved it. And it was a huge success. You probably don't put much stock in my opinion but I'd recommend it.

 

[Lantern Venom]

I get what you've been saying, I just find no credibility to the complaint. Ock is one of Spidey's most deadly and powerful enemies. That's why he can go toe to toe with Spidey, the entire Sinister Six etc. Your issues over tissue damage and joints in the tentacles sound like fanboy made non entity complaints. Particularly when you seemingly have no issue with Molina's Ock in this regard just because he looks like he has a more sturdier body. Again no offense meant.



Superior Spider-Man is a classic example of our aforementioned discussion about Ock being the anti-Peter Parker. That's why Marvel chose him to inhabit Peter's body and life for the last two years. He fits so easily into it because he comes from the same kind of background and life as Peter. They really went full on with it and the gamble paid off.

I loved it. And it was a huge success. You probably don't put much stock in my opinion but I'd recommend it.

Am I being too critical? Perhaps. But I've always felt like Ock was the odd man out in the classic mad scientist villains. Gobby and Lizard have more interesting personalities and more logical character construction. Without a mutant healing factor or a tech suit that protects his entire body, Ock would not only be easy prey once a super-powered being engaged him in trapping/grappling range, his sub-standard human body would be wrecked in a short time just by playing host to such an apparatus.

A friend of mine, also a 35+ year Spider-man reader, has similar feelings about the Lizard. He doesn't feel Lizzy is necessary with the Goblins and Ock around. We've been having similar conversations like this for 20 years.

However, you might be happy know that our conversation made me realize that Doc Ock was a glaring omission in my 6"-7" CB figure collection. I thought if the likes of Eclipso and Psycho-Pirate have a place on my shelves of 400+ figures, Ock certainly does too. I spent $35 on the Legends Series 8 Ock.

But don't do that again, because I can't afford it.

 

[Lantern Venom]

So I assembled the Marvel Legends Ock today, and as as I put the arms on it, the figure flopped over again and again. They were simply too heavy and bulky for the body to balance. The symbolism was delicious.

 

[Nardz937]

All of the villains in Spider-Man 3 were good, but they all had potential to be great. The villains in Amazing Spider-Man 2 belong in an episode of the 1960's Batman TV Series. Foxx and Giamati's performances and dialogue were downright embarrassing. And The Green Goblin looked like a 70 pound troll-doll.

 

[Lantern Venom]

All of the villains in Spider-Man 3 were good, but they all had potential to be great. The villains in Amazing Spider-Man 2 belong in an episode of the 1960's Batman TV Series. Foxx and Giamati's performances and dialogue were downright embarrassing. And The Green Goblin looked like a 70 pound troll-doll.

I'd rank Foxx's outstanding Electro as the 3rd best incarnation of a Spidey villain in live-action, behind Molina's Ock and Dafoe's Goblin.

And as cheesy as Giamati's Rhino was, it was still light years ahead of Blowphervenom and his "acting".

 

[The Joker]

All of the villains in Spider-Man 3 were good, but they all had potential to be great. The villains in Amazing Spider-Man 2 belong in an episode of the 1960's Batman TV Series. Foxx and Giamati's performances and dialogue were downright embarrassing. And The Green Goblin looked like a 70 pound troll-doll.

Hear hear

Though even the 60's Batman show is too good for them. The likes of Burgess Meredith's Penguin, Gorshin's Riddler, and Romero's Joker alone act rings around them.

 

[A Necessary Evil]

So I assembled the Marvel Legends Ock today, and as as I put the arms on it, the figure flopped over again and again. They were simply too heavy and bulky for the body to balance. The symbolism was delicious.

Kinda like how I saw a Venom toy at TRU tonight,it looked cheaply made and poorly designed, like Venom's motivation.

 

[Lantern Venom]

Kinda like how I saw a Venom toy at TRU tonight,it looked cheaply made and poorly designed, like Venom's motivation.

I better get there and get one before another Florida mom realizes he killed those guards at the vault and gets the fig yanked.

 

[DX]

Kinda like how I saw a Venom toy at TRU tonight,it looked cheaply made and poorly designed, like Venom's motivation.

Burrrrrrrrrrrrrrrn!

 

[A Necessary Evil]

Burrrrrrrrrrrrrrrn!

I better get there and get one before another Florida mom realizes he killed those guards at the vault and gets the fig yanked.

 

[Lantern Venom]

]

 

[LEVITIKUZ]

Kinda like how I saw a Venom toy at TRU tonight,it looked cheaply made and poorly designed, like Venom's motivation.

This is gonna be my sig.

 

[Lantern Venom]

 

[A Necessary Evil]

This is gonna be my sig.

 

[OriginalMiles]

My opinion:

Dane's Harry = Franco's Harry

Sandman > RHINO

Electro > Venom

 

[Lantern Venom]

My opinion:

Dane's Harry = Franco's Harry

It's not a fair comparison at this point, but Dane has his work out for him.

 

[Doctor Octopus]

All of the villains in Spider-Man 3 were good, but they all had potential to be great. The villains in Amazing Spider-Man 2 belong in an episode of the 1960's Batman TV Series. Foxx and Giamati's performances and dialogue were downright embarrassing. And The Green Goblin looked like a 70 pound troll-doll.

So true.